SAN BERNARDINO >> Unlike every other retiree in this and other bankrupt California cities, 23 retired San Bernardino police officers would lose part of their pension in the city’s bankruptcy plan — and they’re going public with their opposition to those cuts.

The officers would still get payments from the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, but a retirement supplement from a private firm called the Public Agency Retirement System would be eliminated.

In bankruptcy documents, the city said it thought it had a deal with the retirees to end the PARS supplement and instead distribute the $1.8 million in assets in that fund to the 23 officers.

In court and in letters and statements to the City Council, several of the officers are making clear that there’s no deal.

The PARS supplement — which the city used to boost the officers’ retirements to the level now common for other police and firefighters — makes up 10 to 20 percent of many of those officers’ pensions, retired officer John Montecino told Mayor Carey Davis, the City Council and the public at a meeting Monday.

Montecino highlighted the case of two officers he said depend on PARS: Brian Cartony, a decorated officer he said was ambushed when he responded to a homicide scene, and Mark Johnson, nearly killed on duty by an AK-47.

“Brian and Mark are some of San Bernardino Police Department’s wounded warriors,” Montecino said. “Officers who were willing to put their lives on the line for San Bernardino and now depend on you, Mayor Davis, and this council not to betray them in retirement. Don’t let yesterday’s heroes become today’s outcast.”

Davis said after Monday’s meeting that, as part of the bankruptcy case, any comment on the PARS issue should come from City Attorney Gary Saenz.

Plan details

The city and two unions representing police agreed in 2003 to use the PARS retirement system to give police officers age 50 or older with 20 or more years of service with San Bernardino retirement compensation that equaled the retirement then becoming common statewide: 3 percent at 50, rather than the 3-at-55 the city offered through CalPERS.

That agreement was replaced in 2007, when the city and union began offering the same benefit — retirement benefits of 3 percent of each years’ salary available at age 50 — through CalPERS.

That left 23 officers who retired between 2004 and 2007. The city continued making payments to that retirement fund until shortly after its August 2012 bankruptcy filing.

City officials offer increased sympathy

Although the plan has many moving parts and the city thought it had a deal with the group, it will continue trying to resolve the issue with the PARS retirees, Saenz said.

As he spoke, Saenz noted, he was on his way to bankruptcy mediation with another creditor upset with its treatment under the plan: the Luxembourg-based corporation EEPK that’s fighting for more of the $50 million it’s owed than the 1 percent the city has proposed.

In defending that decision, Saenz has said the city must favor its workforce to continue functioning as a city.

“We are sensitive to our retirees specifically,” Saenz said Monday, reiterating that point. “Obviously they worked for the city and dedicated a lot of time and effort to it. … You’ve heard this described in court as ‘Main Street versus Wall Street,’ that as Wall Street gets more, Main Street gets less, and from the perspective of these retirees, that’s very true.”

The committee representing nearly 2,000 retired city employees said in a December filing that it was sympathetic to “former City police officers who risked decades of their lives and faced dangerous situations in order to protect the City and its populace.”

However, said the group’s attorney, Steven Katzman, it’s possible the PARS retirees’ interests could conflict with other retirees’, so they should be represented by a different attorney.

In response, the city said in a bankruptcy filing that it would revise the plan to include PARS retirees with other unsecured creditors, who would get 1 cent for every dollar they’re owed under the city’s proposed plan.

At least one City Council member, who voted with the majority in the 6-1 approval of that plan, said Monday that he’d been misinformed about PARS.

The retirees deserved what they’d been promised, said Councilman Jim Mulvihill.

“The point is our retirees were told this would be part of their retirement,” said Mulvihill, who’s up for re-election in February. “We pulled the rug out from those 23 officers. These are employees that risked their lives and their health providing security for our population and they planned on this retirement.”

A compromise might be best, he said, but to pay the same 1 percent that bondholders get “isn’t just an injustice, it’s an insult.”

Ryan Hagen covers the city of Riverside for the Southern California Newspaper Group. Since he began covering Inland Empire governments in 2010, he's written about a city entering bankruptcy and exiting bankruptcy; politicians being elected, recalled and arrested; crime; a terrorist attack; fires; ICE; fights to end homelessness; fights over the location of speed bumps; and people's best and worst moments. His greatest accomplishment is breaking a coffee addiction. His greatest regret is any moment without coffee.

Join the Conversation

We invite you to use our commenting platform to engage in insightful conversations about issues in our community. Although we do not pre-screen comments, we reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable to us, and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation, or government request. We might permanently block any user who abuses these conditions.

If you see comments that you find offensive, please use the “Flag as Inappropriate” feature by hovering over the right side of the post, and pulling down on the arrow that appears. Or, contact our editors by emailing moderator@scng.com.